Transactions

OF THE

BANFFSHIRE FIELD CLUB.

THE STRATHMARTINE BanffshireTRUST Field Club

The support of The Strathmartine Trust toward this publication is gratefully acknowledged.

www.banffshirefieldclub.org.uk FRIDAY, DECEMBER 20, 1889.

MEETING AT BANFF.

A MEETING of this Club was held in the Reading Room of the Town and County Club on the evening of Friday —the Rev. James Davidson in the chair. Mr Robert Kelman, teacher, , and Mr John Garden, draper, Banff, were admitted members of the Club. The Secretary read the following paper by Mr A. W. Farquhar, M.A., Bracoden :— ON SOME ENTRIES IN THE GAMRIE REGISTERS—1704-1804. Many things are recorded in the old registers of Gamrie. The present paper deals with some of them roughly grouped together, but sufficient material is left for one of my successors to gratify a future secretary of the Field Club with the promise of something to fill in an evening. Nomenclature. Strangers call the parish Gamrie; the local pronuncia. tion is Gam(e)rie. How it may have been pronounced originally I do not know; but certainly, from the earliest register, the spelling is Gamrie. From 1733 to 1748, however, it is spelled some half-dozen times Gamery, and it is always so spelled by Mr Peterkin, minister of Macduff, in his notes on that district of the parish. Gamry occurs three times; once, in 1712, by Rev. Robert Mitchell, but, as he was a law unto himself in the matter of spelling, that does not count for much ; once, in 1729, in an entry giving the contents of a letter from the minister of Aberdour ; and once, in 1731, with the minister of King-Edward acting as Moderator during a Banffshirevacancy, and possibly dictating, oFieldr even writing, th e Club scroll of the minute. Fairly enough we may say that the ordinary session-clerk spells Gamrie. The town in the west end of the parish is, at first, Down, then Down, and latterly Macduff. In the register relating to the affairs of Macduff, an entry of date 31st August 1783 states that from and after the 3rd of September the town will be called Macduff; but in the list of poor in November following, Down is employed throughout, and not till 9th February 1781 does the name Macduff occur. In the records of 4

the parish proper, the name Macduff does not appear till 11th April 1784. The larger village in the eastern end was called Powistown (1704), Powiston (1707), Powe- town (1719), Powiestown (1720), Shore of Gamrie (1733), and (1734). The smaller village IS un- doubtedly , though from 1733 to 1757 it is at least five times spelled Crivie. In 1712, Mr Mitchell, who troubled hie head very little about uniformity in the matter of spelling, gives Corvy, Cribie, Croby, on one page dealing with one discipline case. The estate is Troup, but from 1757 to 1768 there are some four times where the spelling is Troop. Of the other place-names I mention only Afforsk, which is spelled in the earliest register Auchrosk. Of the names of persons now com- mon in the district, Nicol appears in 1707, Watt in 1715, Wiseman in 1747 (on several occasions the name Weith- man appears before this, and never appears after, and is likely the same name), Lyall in 1718, and West in 1732, but these last two, at this early period, only in Macduff. Historical Notices. In the record of fasts and thanksgivings we may trace the general history of the country. Treaties, wars, rebellions, riots, successes, disasters, sins, and shortcomings are all faithfully celebrated or bemoaned; but these are common property in all the records, and I pass them by. I remark rather on the omissions. India is never mentioned, probably because the successes in it were successes of a company, and not of the nation as a whole. The unions of 1707 and 1801 were severely let alone, perhaps because the Privy Council and the Assembly wished these events to be as little referred to publicly as possible, at a time when men's minds were in a ferment. It will not do to say (as a cynical member of the Club says) that the deaths and the accessions of the sovereigns were not noticed, because the dead king was past praying for and the new king was not worthy of it. I prefer to suppose that distance from the metropolis precluded the people of Gamrie from mourning or rejoicing with their fellow countrymen nearer the seat of government. I am aware that, about the end of the 17th century, there was an unreasoning craze about the activity of the Jesuits and Catholic priests, and also that a very stringent Act was passed against Papists owards the end of William's reign, but I fail to find any sufficient reason why, in March 1705, the minister was ordered to read a proclamation against Papists. I am Banffshirenot aware of any special activitFieldy or overt act o n Clubthe part of Catholics to cause this to be done at this particular date. At first sight, 1709 seems a strange time for a sermon of thanksgiving for the restitution of monarchy, but when we recollect that the date (29th May) was the date of the entry into London of Charles II., and also his birthday, and that on that very day the jubilee of his restoration began, the date seems a fitting enough 5

one. The explanation may be insufficient ; but it so, my statement of these difficulties and omissions will form good enough pegs for some of the members to hang a few remarks on. Newspaper Notes. The kirk session was wonderfully kind in allowing special collections: and their sympathies seem to have been tolerably wide. There are to be found collections for Harbours at (1704), Elgin (Lossiemouth) (1707). Banff (1710 and 1727) ; for Bridges at Dye (1710), Old Meldrum (1720), Never (1723), Ellon (1791); for Places of Worship, at (1745); Gilcomston (1771); (1793); for Churches, Lithuanian (1718), Op- pressed Churches of New York (1725), Heidelberg(1725), Breslau (1751), Pennsylvania (1752) ; for the Infirmary, almost every year; for The Society for the Propagation of Christian Knowledge (1736 and 1775); for the Law Expenses of King-Edward, in the great case against the town of Aberdeen (1724); for Sufferers by Fire, at Canongate of Edinburgh (1710), Monymusk (1732), Park (1734), Forgue (1739), Marnoch (1749), Aberdour (1762), and for a very large number of other sufferers both in Gamrie and in the neighbouring parishes. There is little to remark on so far aB the above entries are concerned. I may, however, mention that in notic- ing the collection for Pennan Harbour, it is stated that it was authorised by an Act of Connoil allowing a volun- tary contribution, and that, at the Laird of Auchmed- den's request the moderator 'recommended to the elders to gather it among the commonalty donation (as they did lately for John Thomson, jr., his redemption from Algerine slavery), the minister himself being to apply to the gentry.' This is the only reference I find to Algerine slavery in the Gamrie registers, and whether John Thomson was a Gamrie man or not the records do not state. The fire at the Canongate seems to have been on a large scale; the others appear to have been less destructive. Among the sufferers otherwise than by fire, were the widow and children of one Irvin, killed at Mill of in 1777, and William Stephen, an Elgin merchant, who had been cruelly robbed at Rothiemurcus in 1726. Regarding our own local sufferers, the only entries worthy of note ore on 2nd May 1756, when a collection was made for Peter Wishart, in Jackston, whose wife had died soon before of wind and snow ; on 14th June Banffshire1761, when one was made foFieldr the children of Alexande Clubr Wiseman, Gardenstown, who had been cast away in a boat at sea; on 4th June 1769, when one was made for the widow of George Adamson, Down, who also had been cast away; and on 17th January 1773, when a special collection was made for widow Smith, in Down, whose husband and two children had been lost in the ferryboat at Banff. It is rather remarkable that, in the 6

course of a hundred years, a sea-board parish, with daring fishermen, should have only two, or at the out- side three, such references to disasters at sea. There can have been no great disaster during the period, and such disasters as had happened must have occurred to persons well to do, or having friends that were very well able to provide for the widows and orphans. It is almost certain that there must have been more losses sustained than the ones recorded. Comparisons are at all times odious, but the four following entries attraot attention in the payments to the poor:—A poor man once a schoolmaster, 12s.; do., a broken merchant, £2; do., a poor man once a minister, £2 8s.; Christian Fandie, a converted Jew, £3. Happy Jew: poor dominie! Failure of Crops. The great years of dearth and scarcity, consequent on failure of crops, are 1741, 1783 and 84. 1796, 1800. The failure had been pretty severe in 1740, bat the session seems to have tided over 1741 with the extra payment of £72 (Scots) for '9 bolls of meal bought from Troup's factor for the support of the poor in the last summer of dearth and scarcity at £8 per boll.' The next mentioned famine seems to have taxed the energies of the session to the utmost, for I find that a meeting of the heritors and session was held on 13th May 1783 to • concert the best means of supplying the wants of the poor in this year of so great calamity and dearth.' The meeting round that a large sum must be spent on the poor and the poorer classes; and, in as much as the money of the session was all at that time tied up, they authorized the junior minister (Rev. Thomas Wilson) to borrow, on his bill, on account of the session, to the extent of £133 6s. 8d., and to purchase somewhere 200 bolls of barley and pease meal. It was further decided that 100 bolls should be lor the benefit of the poor on the estates of Troup and Northfleld and the other 100 for those on the estates of Fife and Melrose. It was estimated that fifty bolls in each district should satisfy the ordinary poor, and decided that the remainder should be sold at a reason- able price, say one shilling per peck, but in no case at less than tenpence. A loss was anticipated, but what- ever deficiency or intake should result from the trans- action was to be made np from the funds of the session. After the meeting the heritors had changed their minds, and had determined to take a livelier interest in the poor of the parish ; for, on. 8th June, Mr Wilson was able to report that Fife and BanffshireTroup had resolved to impor Fieldt grain at Dow nClub and at Gardenstown, which they were to sell out at a moderate price. The session, therefore, agreed to dis- tribute monthly among the poor such sums as would purchase what the session considered a necessary amount of meal; and to save the need of a bill, some of the members of session agreed to lend, without interest, such sums as the poorer people required. They received repayment when some of the invested funds were called up at Martinmas. The total amount expended is not very clear, but in the Macduff end ninety families, com- prising 215 individuals, were relieved (over and above the ordinary poor) at an expense of upwards of £50, of which Fife contributed £10; Mr George Robinson, Banff, £10; and the session the rest. In Macduff there was also distributed to the amount of nine bolls of public charity meal afforded by the Government. In 1784, a further Bum of £10 was sent by the session for distribution in Macduff. In the eastern end the lists are not given, but, as nearly as I can make out, a rather larger sum was spent each year on the poorer classes there. One good effect of the scarcity in the eastern end was the formation of a society in Gardenstown, whose chief aim was to provide for any year of dearth in the future. I have not been able to get the history of the society, but tradition states that it did good work in its day, and when its work was done it died a natural death. With some of its funds it built a hall in Gardens- town, which was in existence and in use within the memory of many still living. Latterly, it was used as a school, with Mr Nicolson as teacher. In 1796, the state of matters was again serious, and an appeal was made from the pulpit to the farmers and others to give meal at reduced prices, or to give subscriptions to enable poor people to buy. There is no notice taken of the farmers having sold meal at reduced prices; but the elders in April and in June handed in £10 2s. 4d. of subscriptions which they had received, and that sum was accordingly spent on the reduotion of the price of meal. In 1800, another time of dearth appears. On 10th April, the minister and elders came to the conclusion that the ordinary funds were insufficient to support the poor, and they oalled a meeting of heritors and all con- cerned for 22nd May to see what steps should be taken. No one but the Session appeared. The minister, how- ever, was able to state that he had seen Fife and Troup, and that they were of opinion that the capital in the hands of the Session should be enoroached upon; and the Session being of the same mind (with the support they got, how could they be otherwise ?), a sum of £50, with interest thereon, was called up, and apportioned to the several ends of the parish, to reduce the price of meal. To all appearance, Macduff had been rapidly Banffshiregrowing, as, on this oocasion ,Field that district got £34 14sClub„ and the eastern end received only £18 as its proportion- ate share. The society at Gardenstown was the medium through which the last mentioned sum was distributed. Police News. Not to make this paper unconscionably long, I shall select only two or three of the earlier cases, and mean- while abstain from imposing more upon you. On 27th May 1711, Mr John Miln, Barnhill of 8

Montbletton, intimated to the Session that a female child had been laid down at his door daring the preceding week, and asked advice as to what he shonld do in the circumstances. The child was put out to nurse, and the elders were ordered to investigate. From information received, suspicion fell upon a woman who had lodged lately with John Gauld, Gellyhill. John was summoned, but he pleaded ignorance, and denied all knowledge of the woman's whereabouts, and was warned of the dangers of prevarication. Fear of punishment and a week's cogitations caused John to conclude that she might possibly be at . Acting on this hint, and fortified with a letter from the minister, some of the elders followed the cine, and safely spotted their woman. She was out of their jurisdiction, however, and the minister of Aberchirder sent them home with a letter in reply to the minister's one. This was found to be so unsatisfactory, that, • with and bye ye consent of Troup, orders were given to prosecute those who harboured the woman before the Sheriff of Banff. Decree was got against the minister and kirk-session of Aberchirder, but there is no hint as to what became of the woman then or thereafter. On 16th November 1718, information was lodged with the session that a seaman in Donn had been guilty of execrable swearing,' and he was accordingly taken before the session. He pleaded not guilty, and 30th November was appointed as the day of his trial. The kirk officer, acting on instructions, produced seven witnesses, who, being solemnly sworn, purged of malice and partial counsel, gave such evidence as conclusively proved the man's guilt. He was found guilty on the evidence, and was ordered to appear on December 17th to be publicly rebuked, and warned that, should he be guilty of a like offence again, he should receive a much severer punishment next time. The public rebuke was efficacious ; he does not appear again. The next case deals with the crime of Sabbath breaking. On 20th October 1723, the minister stated in Session that a report had reached him that a breach of the Sabbath had ocourred lately at Clayden, and the Session appointed Adam Durham, an elder in that distriot, to inquire into the truth of the allegation. It may be that Adam had little of the detective about him. At all events he was a cautious man, and he deferred saying anything about it for some time, thinking, per- Banffshirehaps, that the affair would soon bFielde forgotten. But i n Club this he was mistaken. Happening to be at a meeting on 17th November, he was interrogated as to the result of his diligence, and, canny man, he reported that he could get no certainty about the matter. But wanton gossip had been busy, and from other sources it was suggested to the session that William, Jock, and Robert Findlater were the principal actors in the fray. These were, therefore, summoned. Jock appeared first, and 9

his deposition came practically to this: 1st, that he was at Clayden on the Sabbath mentioned; 2nd, that words passed between him and Findlater on said day; 3rd, that Findlater came upon him unawares and dragged his hair; 4th, that he thrnst Findlater into a nook ; and 5th, that there was no more of it. Findlater appeared on the eighth December, and his answers to the condescendence were: As to 1st and 2nd, admits that Jock was present, and that words passed between them; quoad ultra denies and avers that Jock threw a capful of ale in his face, and took him by the hair, and that he thrust Jook into a nook, and there was no more of it. The Session, finding from their admissions and averments that both had been guilty of breach of the Sabbath, ordered them to stand in the pillory and be publicly rebuked, and each to pay a fine of twenty shillings. The paper, which was listened to with much interest gave rise to considerable discussion among the members present. On the motion of the Chairman, the Secretary was instructed to oonvey the thanks of the meeting to Mr Farquhar for his interesting and instructive paper. A vote of thanks to the Chairman concluded the business.

Banffshire Field Club